I wonder about any flavor differences with corn meal instead of whole or flaked corn.

George Fix (a long ago beer writer) wrote an article entitled: CAP - Explorations in Pre-Prohibition American Lagers. Within that article he wrote:

“The primary feature that separates this beer from all-malt continental lagers is the use of flaked maize, an unmalted cereal grain. The flakes are hardly a cheap malt substitute. Indeed, they typically cost two to three times more than domestic malt, and they are even more expensive than premium imported malts. What one gets with this specialty grain is extra strength without the satiating effects of a high-gravity beer. Alcohol by itself is essentially tasteless. Nevertheless, it is a flavor carrier, enhancing the other active flavor components in a beer, as it does in this formulation. The maize also leaves a pleasant grain-like sweetness in the finished beer. The chief advantage that flakes have over corn grits or rice is that, unlike the latter, flakes do not require cooking at boiling temperatures to achieve gelatinization. Many feel that this is the key to the flakes' desirable flavoring (2).”

So, George Fix appears to be of the opinion that flaked maize has “desirable flavoring”.

Cheers!

If by desireable he meant less flavor, then yes.

In the old days a brewery would have a cereal cooker. Now they don't have one and use flaked maize.

It might be good to do an experiment to see the results of a cereal mash vs. flaked maize.

“If by desirable he meant less flavor, then yes.” I didn’t interpret it that way since in that paragraph George Fix made mention of: “Nevertheless, it is a flavor carrier, enhancing the other active flavor components in a beer, as it does in this formulation. The maize also leaves a pleasant grain-like sweetness in the finished beer.” So, I think that George Fix thinks that desirable flavor = more (or better) flavor.

“In the old days a brewery would have a cereal cooker. Now they don't have one and use flaked maize.” Well, some of the regional brewers have cereal cookers. I saw the cereal cooker at Spoetzl (Shiner) Brewery when I took a tour. I would guess that on the commercial brewery scale that corn grits would be cheaper (from a material perspective) than flaked maize. As a homebrewer, I think that flaked maize is not cheap at $1.75 per lb. (as compared to $1.25 for 6-row malt).

“It might be good to do an experiment to see the results of a cereal mash vs. flaked maize.” That would indeed be a good experiment!

I wonder about any flavor differences with corn meal instead of whole or flaked corn.

George Fix (a long ago beer writer) wrote an article entitled: CAP - Explorations in Pre-Prohibition American Lagers. Within that article he wrote:

“The primary feature that separates this beer from all-malt continental lagers is the use of flaked maize, an unmalted cereal grain. The flakes are hardly a cheap malt substitute. Indeed, they typically cost two to three times more than domestic malt, and they are even more expensive than premium imported malts. What one gets with this specialty grain is extra strength without the satiating effects of a high-gravity beer. Alcohol by itself is essentially tasteless. Nevertheless, it is a flavor carrier, enhancing the other active flavor components in a beer, as it does in this formulation. The maize also leaves a pleasant grain-like sweetness in the finished beer. The chief advantage that flakes have over corn grits or rice is that, unlike the latter, flakes do not require cooking at boiling temperatures to achieve gelatinization. Many feel that this is the key to the flakes' desirable flavoring (2).”

So, George Fix appears to be of the opinion that flaked maize has “desirable flavoring”.